The following was transcribed Nov. 14 from the prerecorded video for today's conference at MGIMO, the Russian Foreign Ministry's university, on "Practical Analysis of Problems in the Post-Crisis Development of the World Economy." It was shown at the plenary session this morning. The video was released with Russian subtitles and named, "The Breakdown Crisis of the Trans-Atlantic Monetarist System and Its Political Consequences."
A second, 40-minute video, called "Economic Development in Earth's Next 50 Years: A Hamiltonian Credit Policy vs. the Current Policy of Monetarism, Genocide, and War" and narrated by Michael Kirsch, was featured in one of the conference workshops the afternoon.
SKY SHIELDS: [In Russian.] Good day. My name is Sky Shields. I am a leader of the Basement scientific research group of the LaRouche Political Action Committee. Thank you for the invitation to address this conference at MGIMO. Allow me to introduce to you the American economist and political figure, Lyndon LaRouche.
[In English.] Lyn, we find ourselves in a very exciting, and dangerous, strategic situation right now. We're looking at a series of coups being launched across Europe, by bankers, in response to the meltdown of the entire trans-Atlantic financial system. On our end of it, we're seeing the incredibly bellicose response from the British, but then, the British-controlled puppet, U.S. President Barack Obama, making explicit threats against major nations, not only Syria and Iran, but also Russia and China. There's a lot of people right now, trying to come up with an analysis of the situation, but you've been unique in forecasting almost every element that we're now currently experiencing.
I'd like to ask you right now, it seems clear we are not at the end of this at all. In fact, the worst is yet to come. What is your assessment of where we stand right now, and what needs to be done?
LYNDON LAROUCHE: We're on two dangers: One, is the economic danger, and the European side, especially, from the European-Atlantic side, is right at the end-point of general breakdown crisis. This is especially strong in the Continental European sector; the British sector is a little less vulnerable. But you have to realize that the rest of Continental Western Europe has absolutely no security, whatsoever. It is simply going into a hyperinflationary breakdown process. So there, we could expect at the moment, nothing from Europe that's good, unless there's a fundamental change that proceeds before there's a general breakdown crisis.
We're having a situation which is comparable to Germany in 1923: It's a hyperinflationary process. Germany was isolated, when it was victimized by hyperinflation. This time it's more balanced among a group of nations, therefore it didn't come on quite as fast, but it's coming on now. We're at the end point.
The United States is under the influence of an insane President, who is controlled, essentially, from London. He's a London puppet, and this is a disaster.
So therefore, you have two pictures of the world: One is the trans-Atlantic side, in which this is the side that's in general breakdown. One of the exceptions is Argentina; Argentina's one of the few countries in the trans-Atlantic region which is still stable, for special reasons.
Then, you have on the other side, the Pacific side. Now, I would include Russia, essentially, in the Pacific side, because it's actually, the orientation of development of Russia is moving largely toward the Pacific Ocean, together with China, and together with Asia.
So you have a trans-Pacific region of the world which is more hopeful than the trans-Atlantic region. But the point is, we're now at a point where the whole thing can come down in a chain-reaction. That Eastern Europe and Asia has a much better resilience, right now, to the crisis, because of the terrible situation in Europe, in particular. But the whole world is ready to come down.
We're also threatened, as often happens, with a Third World War. The first one, of course, was actually started with the ouster of Bismarck in Germany, and that blew things open, and opened up for the British role in creating World War I. Then we had the Second World War, which was, again, much more destructive than the first one. And now, we're on the verge of a third one.
And it could happen. You have a concentration in the eastern part of the Mediterranean and in the Indian Ocean region, around a kind of a "New Balkans" area, which is the Middle East area. This area is ready to be the cockpit, with the greatest concentration of thermonuclear weapons concentration in the Eastern Mediterranean and in this area in the Indian Ocean. So we could have,— and there is a threat of this,— a triggering, by Israel and by other kinds of factors, a triggering of what becomes a general Third World War. But this time, as we understood since World War II, we've understood that you can not have major wars any more, because the weapons of choice are thermonuclear weapons. You can not put a lid on this.
We're come to the point, as we understood with the SDI effort, which I was involved in, that you can no longer have major wars among nations. You have to find other means of resolving the problems. Now, we're at a point, where, again, we're faced with a potential of a third war, but this time, a thermonuclear war, because the only significant weaponry for this area of conflict, which goes into Asia, is in this area. The only possibility is thermonuclear warfare.
So therefore, the question is pre-empting the world situation strategically, and avoiding thermonuclear war—because it's the U.S. thermonuclear arsenal, which is the key to a threat of a major war. And right now, around this issue, there in the Middle East, we actually do not have a local crisis situation: We have a threat of a worldwide, thermonuclear warfare situation.
So, against this, we have to define what the alternatives are, what the solutions are. The problem right now, is the President of the United States. President Obama is the key to triggering thermonuclear war. The man is clinically insane. I can say it as an American; I've said it before, I've diagnosed him as this type before, and if he's allowed to run loose, he can trigger a thermonuclear war.
The hope is, that in the United States, there'll be action to remove him from office. That actually would secure peace. As long as he remains in office, the danger of triggering a war, with the consent of the British Monarchy, is there.
Now, at the same time, we have a developing development among some of us in the United States, some leading people, or some influential people, who understand that the cooperation of the United States with Russia and China in particular, but also other countries, is the alternative to thermonuclear war. And therefore, it's important, at this time, that those nations and people in nations who understand this, begin to cooperate more closely. I think the potential for cooperation is great now, but we have to get that cooperation, we have to establish it. And under those conditions, we can actually reverse this trend.
I think that, within a ten-year period, if you're looking ten years ahead, we could actually reverse these effects. There's a potential in China; there is a potential in Russia that is well known there, in particular, economic; India is a positive factor. If we can get peace in Africa, if we can get peace in Europe, some more stability in Europe, I think we're looking at the possibility, out of the sheer horror of what has happened to nations — the destruction of the nations of Continental Europe, for example; the breakdown crisis which is going on in the United States right now; the terrible conditions in Africa, the conditions in Central American and in South America, at the same time as the conditions in Africa —so we have all the incentives to say, "Let's become sensible." And we have now, the possibility, centered on the trans-Pacific region, the cooperation across the Pacific region, which involves Russia and China, in particular, but other nations which will cooperate with that, is our best hope.
So, we have the two options: On the one hand, we're threatened by the greatest menace, in terms of warfare, in modern times. On the other hand, we have opportunities which are being developed, and if they're allowed to develop, can mean the greatest advantage for mankind.
The projects we have, the projects we can launch now, are the greatest projects ever conceived of mankind. We have a revolution we're going to conduct in the United States, if we can. It will involve the water systems: We're going to change the nature of the water systems in the world. We have large engineering projects.
We must go into space. We must revive the space program, we must go ahead in that direction. People do not understand some of the reasons why we must go into space, why we must take this kind of risky venture of human beings' going into space, but we must do it.
So, before us, is for the imagination, the greatest opportunity mankind has ever known, involving the space program among other things, and at the same thing, greatest danger to mankind ever known. And our problem is, to tilt the balance to make sure it comes out the right way!
SHIELDS: And all of this of this hinges on achieving this trans-Pacific alliance, this trans-Pacific orientation of the world, dumping the British orientation we've gotten in the U.S. now with Obama, eliminating him, and eliminating that as a force here, but then shifting our policy, now, towards this kind of alliance, first — Russia, China.
LAROUCHE: That's it. Actually, the keystone is Russia, because it's a transition nation-state, a European and Asian. It has an Asian orientation right now. The Asian orientation makes a lot of sense: There are rich resources there which can be developed. China and Russia need each other in Asia, because they're complementary. China has the great population, Russia has the potential of developing the northern part. This can be the great stimulus.
SHIELDS: And that goes along well, as you were describing, with what NAWAPA as a development project means for the U.S.; this, our Western-Northern development matches up perfectly with the kind of Far East development and Siberian development in Russia.
LAROUCHE: We're working, actually, with what we know are some of the greatest large-scale projects that mankind has ever conceived of, just on Earth itself. But, when we realize why we have to go into the area of the Solar System, develop there, which is a subject in itself, we realize that the whole future of mankind can potentially undergo the greatest most impressive result we could imagine.
SHIELDS: Okay! Well, thank you, Lyn. I think that gives some clear marching orders. And in later sessions of this conference, we'll put together in a more detailed way, some of these specific proposals. But I think from this, it's clear what the immediate response to the strategic threat needs to be.
LAROUCHE: Well, I think there's an opportunity of riches in this process. But there's much to be done! There's so much to be done, you can't encompass it all in a short discussion.
SHIELDS: Okay, thank you.